Concept bottleneck models (CBMs) ensure interpretability by decomposing predictions into human interpretable concepts. Yet the annotations used for training CBMs that enable this transparency are often noisy, and the impact of such corruption is not well understood. In this study, we present the first systematic study of noise in CBMs and show that even moderate corruption simultaneously impairs prediction performance, interpretability, and the intervention effectiveness. Our analysis identifies a susceptible subset of concepts whose accuracy declines far more than the average gap between noisy and clean supervision and whose corruption accounts for most performance loss. To mitigate this vulnerability we propose a two-stage framework. During training, sharpness-aware minimization stabilizes the learning of noise-sensitive concepts. During inference, where clean labels are unavailable, we rank concepts by predictive entropy and correct only the most uncertain ones, using uncertainty as a proxy for susceptibility. Theoretical analysis and extensive ablations elucidate why sharpness-aware training confers robustness and why uncertainty reliably identifies susceptible concepts, providing a principled basis that preserves both interpretability and resilience in the presence of noise.

Mobile agents rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) to plan and execute tasks on smartphone user interfaces (UIs). While cloud-based LLMs achieve high task accuracy, they require uploading the full UI state at every step, exposing unnecessary and often irrelevant information. In contrast, local LLMs avoid UI uploads but suffer from limited capacity, resulting in lower task success rates. We propose $\textbf{CORE}$, a $\textbf{CO}$llaborative framework that combines the strengths of cloud and local LLMs to $\textbf{R}$educe UI $\textbf{E}$xposure, while maintaining task accuracy for mobile agents. CORE comprises three key components: (1) $\textbf{Layout-aware block partitioning}$, which groups semantically related UI elements based on the XML screen hierarchy; (2) $\textbf{Co-planning}$, where local and cloud LLMs collaboratively identify the current sub-task; and (3) $\textbf{Co-decision-making}$, where the local LLM ranks relevant UI blocks, and the cloud LLM selects specific UI elements within the top-ranked block. CORE further introduces a multi-round accumulation mechanism to mitigate local misjudgment or limited context. Experiments across diverse mobile apps and tasks show that CORE reduces UI exposure by up to 55.6\% while maintaining task success rates slightly below cloud-only agents, effectively mitigating unnecessary privacy exposure to the cloud.

Multi-task learning (MTL) jointly learns a set of tasks by sharing parameters among tasks. It is a promising approach for reducing storage costs while improving task accuracy for many computer vision tasks. The effective adoption of MTL faces two main challenges. The first challenge is to determine what parameters to share across tasks to optimize for both memory efficiency and task accuracy. The second challenge is to automatically apply MTL algorithms to an arbitrary CNN backbone without requiring time-consuming manual re-implementation and significant domain expertise. This paper addresses the challenges by developing the first programming framework AutoMTL that automates efficient MTL model development for vision tasks. AutoMTL takes as inputs an arbitrary backbone convolutional neural network (CNN) and a set of tasks to learn, and automatically produces a multi-task model that achieves high accuracy and small memory footprint simultaneously. Experiments on three popular MTL benchmarks (CityScapes, NYUv2, Tiny-Taskonomy) demonstrate the effectiveness of AutoMTL over state-of-the-art approaches as well as the generalizability of AutoMTL across CNNs.

Crowdsourced data used in machine learning services might carry sensitive information about attributes that users do not want to share. Various methods have been proposed to minimize the potential information leakage of sensitive attributes while maximizing the task accuracy. However, little is known about the theory behind these methods. In light of this gap, we develop a novel theoretical framework for attribute obfuscation. Under our framework, we propose a minimax optimization formulation to protect the given attribute and analyze its inference guarantees against worst-case adversaries. Meanwhile, there is a tension between minimizing information leakage and maximizing task accuracy. To understand this, we prove an information-theoretic lower bound to precisely characterize the fundamental trade-off between accuracy and information leakage. We conduct experiments on two real-world datasets to corroborate the inference guarantees and validate the inherent trade-offs therein. Our results indicate that, among several alternatives, the adversarial learning approach achieves the best trade-off in terms of attribute obfuscation and accuracy maximization.

Loss of trainability refers to a phenomenon in continual learning where parameter updates no longer make progress on the optimization objective, so accuracy stalls or degrades as the learning problem changes over time. In this paper, we analyze loss of trainability through an optimization lens and find that the phenomenon is not reliably predicted by existing individual indicators such as Hessian rank, sharpness level, weight or gradient norms, gradient-to-parameter ratios, and unit-sign entropy. Motivated by our analysis, we introduce two complementary indicators: a batch-size-aware gradient-noise bound and a curvature volatility-controlled bound. We then combine these two indicators into a per-layer adaptive noise threshold on the effective step-size that anticipates trainability behavior. Using this insight, we propose a step-size scheduler that keeps each layer's effective parameter update below this bound, thereby avoiding loss of trainability. We demonstrate that our scheduler can improve the accuracy maintained by previously proposed approaches, such as concatenated ReLU (CReLU), Wasserstein regularizer, and L2 weight decay. Surprisingly, our scheduler produces adaptive step-size trajectories that, without tuning, mirror the manually engineered step-size decay schedules.

Long-context Large Language Models (LLMs) face significant memory bottlenecks during inference due to the linear growth of key-value (KV) cache with sequence length. While individual optimization techniques like KV cache quantization, chunked prefill, and model weight quantization have shown promise, their joint effects and optimal configurations for edge deployment remain underexplored. We introduce KV Pareto, a systems-level framework that systematically maps the trade-off frontier between total memory consumption and task accuracy across these three complementary optimization techniques. Our framework evaluates multiple LLM architectures (Qwen, Llama, Mistral) with varying KV quantization schemes (int2/4/8, mixed-precision), granularities (per-token, per-tensor, per-block), and 4-bit weight quantization via AWQ. Our framework identifies model-specific Pareto-optimal configurations that achieve 68-78% total memory reduction with minimal (1-3%) accuracy degradation on long-context tasks. We additionally verify the selected frontiers on additional benchmarks of Needle-in-a-Haystack, GSM8k and MMLU as well as extended context lengths of up to 128k to demonstrate the practical need of joint optimization for efficient LLM inference.

Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are often considered black boxes due to their opaque decision-making processes. To reduce their opacity Concept Models (CMs), such as Concept Bottleneck Models (CBMs), were introduced to predict human-defined concepts as an intermediate step before predicting task labels. This enhances the interpretability of DNNs. In a human-machine setting greater interpretability enables humans to improve their understanding and build trust in a DNN. In the introduction of CBMs, the models demonstrated increased task accuracy as incorrect concept predictions were replaced with their ground truth values, known as intervening on the concept predictions. In a collaborative setting, if the model task accuracy improves from interventions, trust in a model and the human-machine task accuracy may increase. However, the result showing an increase in model task accuracy was produced without human evaluation and thus it remains unknown if the findings can be applied in a collaborative setting. In this paper, we ran the first human studies using CBMs to evaluate their human interaction in collaborative task settings. Our findings show that CBMs improve interpretability compared to standard DNNs, leading to increased human-machine alignment. However, this increased alignment did not translate to a significant increase in task accuracy. Understanding the model's decision-making process required multiple interactions, and misalignment between the model's and human decision-making processes could undermine interpretability and model effectiveness.

Modern neural networks rarely have a single way to be right. For many tasks, multiple models can achieve identical performance while relying on different features or reasoning patterns, a property known as the Rashomon Effect. However, uncovering this diversity in deep architectures is challenging as their continuous parameter spaces contain countless near-optimal solutions that are numerically distinct but often behaviorally similar. We introduce Rashomon Concept Bottleneck Models, a framework that learns multiple neural networks which are all accurate yet reason through distinct human-understandable concepts. By combining lightweight adapter modules with a diversity-regularized training objective, our method constructs a diverse set of deep concept-based models efficiently without retraining from scratch. The resulting networks provide fundamentally different reasoning processes for the same predictions, revealing how concept reliance and decision making vary across equally performing solutions. Our framework enables systematic exploration of data-driven reasoning diversity in deep models, offering a new mechanism for auditing, comparison, and alignment across equally accurate solutions.

While current Computer Use Agent (CUA) benchmarks measure task completion effectively, they provide limited assessment of enterprise deployment readiness, emphasizing functional correctness over the operational reliability required for production systems. We present UI-CUBE (UiPath Computer Use BEnchmark), a systematic benchmark comprising 226 tasks across two difficulty tiers designed to expose fundamental architectural limitations in current CUAs. Our evaluation covers simple UI interactions (136 tasks) and complex workflows including copy-paste tasks (50 tasks) and enterprise application scenarios (40 tasks), with systematic interface variation coverage, multi-resolution testing and automated validation of task success through the application state. Evaluation of five state-of-the-art models reveals a sharp capability cliff rather than gradual performance degradation. Simple UI interactions achieve 67-85% success rates (compared to 97.9% human performance), but complex workflows drop precipitously to 9-19%. Human evaluators with no prior application experience achieve only 61.2% on complex tasks despite near-perfect performance on simple tasks, establishing realistic performance ceilings. This discontinuous performance pattern -- where agents achieve 68-87% of human performance on simple tasks but only 15-32% on complex workflows -- indicates fundamental architectural limitations in memory management, hierarchical planning, and state coordination rather than incremental capability gaps addressable through better training or prompting. UI-CUBE functions as an enterprise-readiness diagnostic, revealing that while current CUAs can manipulate individual interface elements, they cannot yet function as reliable workflow automation tools. These findings provide architectural insights essential for developing production-ready CUAs capable of managing complex, multi-step enterprise processes.